On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 02:15:31PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 01:39:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:53:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> This really requires more than no attention to the comments, especially
> > >> since you just removed the only apparent reason for _getObjectDescription
> > >> to make a distinction between objects whose name includes a schema and
> > >> those that don't.
> >
> > > I am confused. Are you saying I didn't read the comments, or that I can
> > > now merge the schema-qualified and non-schema-qualified object sections?
> >
> > Well, it's certainly not immediately obvious why we shouldn't merge them.
> > But I would have expected the function's header comment to now explain
> > that the output is intentionally not schema-qualified and assumes that the
> > search path is set for the object's schema if any.
>
> OK, done with the attached patch. The dump output is unchanged.
To be honest, I never got to modifying the comments because I expected
someone to say the patch was wrong. I also didn't expect to find dead
code in there too.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
